Due to the nature of live programming the ratings for ABC (Oscars) are approximate and subject to more than the typical adjustments in the final numbers. See below for more information on these Fast Affiliate Ratings.

ABC was number one among adults 18-49 and with with total viewers.

On ABC, The 85th Annual Academy Awards earned a 12.1 UPDATE: according to ABC, the Oscars earned a 13.0 adults 18-49 rating from 8:30 to 11:40PM . Last year's telecast scored a 11.7 adults 18-49. Your predictions were about right. Earlier in the night, the Red Carpet arrivals special earned a 5.0 at 7PM, a 6.7 at 7:30PM and a 9.2 at 8PM

The only original running against the Oscars was The Amazing Race, which earned a series low 1.8 adults 18-49 rating, down from last week's 2.5 adults 18-49 rating.

Fast Affiliate Ratings: These first national ratings, including demographics, are available at approximately 11 AM (ET) the day after telecast, and are released to subscribing customers daily. These data, from the National People Meter sample, are strictly time-period information, based on the normal broadcast network feed, and include all programming on the affiliated stations, sometimes including network programming, sometimes not. The figures may include stations that did not air the entire network feed, as well as local news breaks or cutaways for local coverage or other programming. Fast Affiliate ratings are not as useful for live programs and are likely to differ significantly from the final results, because the data reflect normal broadcast feed patterns. For example, with a World Series game, Fast Affiliate Ratings would include whatever aired from 8-11PM on affiliates in the Pacific Time Zone, following the live baseball game, but not game coverage that begins at 5PM PT. The same would be true of Presidential debates as well as live award shows and breaking news reports.

Rating: Estimated percentage of the universe of TV households (or other specified group) tuned to a program in the average minute. Ratings are expressed as a percent.

Share (of Audience): The percent of households (or persons) using television who are tuned to a specific program, station or network in a specific area at a specific time. (See also, Rating, which represents tuning or viewing as a percent of the entire population being measured.)

Time Shifted Viewing – Program ratings for national sources are produced in three streams of data – Live, Live+Same Day (Live+SD) and Live+7 Day. Time shifted figures account for incremental viewing that takes place with DVRs. Live+Same Day (Live+SD) include viewing during the same broadcast day as the original telecast, with a cut-off of 3:00AM local time when meters transmit daily viewing to Nielsen for processing. Live+7 Day ratings include incremental viewing that takes place during the 7 days following a telecast.

You have to be a troll or really stupid to think that the movie Lincoln was about the capital of Nebraska and not the most famous President in U.S history. The movie Lincoln was all over the news and I am sure 95% of the public knew what it was about.

Melissa

@Ekras

Regardless, these numbers are a sham….I’ve been asking around and I have yet to run into ANYONE who actually sat through the oscars last night (outside of the internet) …. most people were either watching TWD or didn’t watch any TV at all.

The numbers are not a sham. ~36 million people were watching the Academy Awards. It’s possible that no one in the small (compared to the tens of thousands of people who tuned in) group of people you asked saw it. It’s statistics. For instance, let’s say all the people you asked that were not watching the Academy Awards were in the adults 18–49 demographic. Last night, *only* 12.1% of television-owning 18–49-year-olds were watching, so that means 87.9% of television-owning 18–49-year olds were not watching. That’s a very large percentage. It’s likely that the people you asked were part of the 87.9% of 18–49-year-olds that were not watching.

Mike

If ABC wants real ratings, start the show at 7 PM EST, so people can actually stay up for all 4 hours. The west coast can deal with an earlier time and they can get more drinking time in after the show concludes, win win.

There were years that the Oscars would hit 50 million. 37 mil isn’t that big in the grand scheme of things.

I would like to see the half hour’s of Amazing Race. I watched the first half hour live, record the 2nd half hour and flipped between commericals during the Oscars.

AniMatsuri

Ratings were up because some of movies up for awards were ones that people have heard of and liked.

The End

@DW

Last nights Walking Dead wasn’t a filler episode, to even suggest it was, obviously implies you didn’t understand it.

Do you need me to explain the significance of building to a climax in a story? What with the Governor rallying his troops, Andrea meeting Rick and Co and returning back with doubts in her mind, considering killing the Governor.

Oliver

Surprised ABC hasn’t ordered timezone adjusted fast nationals

The End

@Melissa
@36 million people were watching the Academy Awards.

Hate to be nitpicky but we have no idea how many actual people were watching the Oscars.

Ben

@Mike: ABC will never start the Academy Awards at 7 PM EST, because 60 Minutes (CBS) would probably beat them in the ratings. Last night they had an interview with a Navy Seal who was on the raid that got osama bin laden. If ABC starts the Academy Awards at 7 PM, 60 Minutes will air an original show that is going to attract the attention of a lot of people.
Starting the Academy Awards at 8 PM instead of 8:30 would make more sense, but, I doubt if ABC wants to take on 60 Minutes after decades of being the most popular newsmagazine on television and getting more viewers than almost any show ABC, NBC, or Fox can air in that time slot (with the execption of NFL Football).

Greendale

A. Seth MacFarlene is a genius and a great host, so no one say otherwise.
B. Sucks for The Amazing Race, but what did you expect?
C. I wonder what The Walking Dead got, hmmm…

FactCheck

>> How pathetic letting the first lady of socialism annoucing the best picture winner.

How pathetic that some fool living in his mom’s basement eating Dominos is here to troll about it.

Melissa

@The End

Hate to be nitpicky but we have no idea how many actual people were watching the Oscars.

*headdesk*

Obviously all Nielsen figures are approximate, but there is a small margin of error, and “everyone” on this site knows Nielsen is an antiquated system. I don’t need to write that general knowledge in all of my comments.

If you’re referring to the fact that these are preliminary fast affiliate ratings, then yes, we all know there will be adjustments in the final report, and again, I don’t need to write general Nielsen information in all of my comments.

I was trying to explain a legitimate statistical concept to Ekras, and your smart aleck reply was unwarranted.

The End

@Melissa

Kudos, not only are you telling me what I already know. You also did so in a manner that would win you an oscar for most dramatic performance.

@and your smart aleck reply

What smart aleck reply? I was mearly stating these aren’t actual people being reported by Nielsen. If you understood the way the system works, and how many boxes are out there, you’d see my point

Melissa

@Ben

ABC will never start the Academy Awards at 7 PM EST, because 60 Minutes (CBS) would probably beat them in the ratings.

I agree with you that the Academy Awards will probably never be pushed up, but it has nothing to do with 60 Minutes, which really isn’t a hit unless it has a football overrun lead-in. From 7-8, ABC’s Red Carpet coverage averaged a 5.9. That number is well ahead of 60 Minutes‘ 1.3 in the hour.

Melissa

@The End

Kudos, not only are you telling me what I already know. You also did so in a manner that would win you an oscar for most dramatic performance. What smart aleck reply? I was mearly stating these aren’t actual people being reported by Nielsen. If you understood the way the system works, and how many boxes are out there, you’d see my point

If you already knew, you wouldn’t have written that uncertain response. And sorry, what do you mean there aren’t actual people being reported by Nielsen? That statement makes it clear that you are the one who doesn’t understand the Nielsen system.

Nielsen has a sample consisting of tens of thousands of people that represent the larger United States population. If you knew anything about statistics, you would know that the sample size is large enough to provide an accurate estimate.

So yes, we all know that not everyone is included in the sample, therefore as I said, there will be a minute margin of error. But basically you’re trying to argue that Nielsen ratings are not reliable, which is ironic because you post here a lot and seem to trust them most of the time. That is, when you’re not trying to pick a fight with me because I stated the preliminary total viewership number for the Academy Awards.

Ben

@Melissa: 1.3 for 60 Minutes was for a Repeat episode. If ABC aired the Academy Awards opposite 60 Minutes, they would probably air an Original episode and give ABC a run for the ratings. ABC losing ratings when the host is giving an opening monologue is not going to the rest of the awards show any good for the remainder of the evening.
“60 Minutes which really isn’t a hit unless it has a football overrun lead-in”. Considering 60 Minutes has been on the air since 1968 and it gets better ratings than almost anything ABC, Fox, or NBC has aired in that time slot (with the execption of Football) I would say that the evidence for 60 Minutes being a giant hit for CBS for decades is overwhelming.

rob60990

Excellent for the Oscars. ABC really needed this to boost their average.

Scandal’s promo was horrible. The only thing Kerry Washington was missing was a pole. Anyways, what shows ABC promoted during the Oscars don’t really matter. I never see proof of any long term gains from a promo during the Oscars. Even CBS hyping their lineup during the Super Bowl did nothing but a one time boost for HIMYM.

Melissa

@Ben

1.3 for 60 Minutes was for a Repeat episode. If ABC aired the Academy Awards opposite 60 Minutes, they would probably air an Original episode and give ABC a run for the ratings. ABC losing ratings when the host is giving an opening monologue is not going to the rest of the awards show any good for the remainder of the evening. “60 Minutes which really isn’t a hit unless it has a football overrun lead-in”. Considering 60 Minutes has been on the air since 1968 and it gets better ratings than almost anything ABC, Fox, or NBC has aired in that time slot (with the execption of Football) I would say that the evidence for 60 Minutes being a giant hit for CBS for decades is overwhelming.

Second, yes 60 Minutes performs very good for an old news show. But what I meant is that it doesn’t pull big ratings (3.0+) unless it has a huge football lead-in. Without that lead-in, it’s usually in the 1’s.

So unless CBS had a football overrun the night of the Academy Awards to give 60 Minutes a boost, the news show would not be competition at all, and it would probably take a hard decline against a major awards show.

The End

@Melissa

Before I respond to these points, why are you so highly strung? By the way you act, you take everything personally, when really there is no need. I mean, chill out a bit, lessen your blood pressure some.

@And sorry, what do you mean there aren’t actual people being reported by Nielsen?

I suggest re reading my comment again, and if you don’t understand, re read it a second and third time. I said these aren’t actual people being reported by Nielsen. I couldn’t be anymore clearer. 34 million people wern’t tracked and confirmed as watching the Oscar

@That statement makes it clear that you are the one who doesn’t understand the Nielsen system.

No it doesn’t. I can’t be held to blame if people miss my point entirely.

@Nielsen has a sample consisting of tens of thousands of people

Tens of thosands, you mean about 20,000 households right? as of 2013.

@If you knew anything about statistics, you would know that the sample size is large enough to provide an accurate estimate

So because I don’t agree with you, I don’t understand Statistics? Amusing. I don’t believe the sample size is accurate. Simple as. Too many households, too little boxes. I’ve always been a fan of increasing the sample size, and have said so enough on here over the years.

@But basically you’re trying to argue that Nielsen ratings are not reliable

They’re not. There’s just nothing better out there.

@which is ironic because you post here a lot and seem to trust them most of the time.

I don’t view the Nielsen numbers as ‘People’ I view them as reported viewers. Notice that networks and staff here use the term ‘viewers’ not ‘People’. Also thanks for noticing my posts, I feel honored lol

@when you’re not trying to pick a fight with me

Sorry but when did I do that? I aimed one harmless comment at you, which you immediately went on the defensive over and made you seem like someone who could use some Anger Management.

Roco

@rob, dude you’re amazing, and I don’t mean that in a good way!

Anthony Parello (AP076)

@ Ben

As Melissa said there are many reasons The Oscars won’t move to 7pm (like folks walking the red carpet at 2pm PST) but fear of 60 minutes taking away their ratings. You cannot be serious with your assertion.

The last two new episodes of 60 minutes got a 1.3 and a 1.8, one week and two weeks ago The Red Carpet Special average a 5.9 from 7-8pm. There is no way that would have a meaningful effect on The Oscars.

There is no arguing that 60 minutes is the premier network news show and that it does very well but would it “injure” The Oscars. Not a bit.